Simple and Elegant Plan (9/11)

Erm to be honest with you I don't know. I thought both nationalities were arabic. I apologise if I was calling you dumb though such was not my
intention.

But back to my other point. You know people leap frogging from President to president. I think that shows they are patient. They know that if you act
hastily you run a higher chance of disaster.
After all the only thing that killed Hitler in my opinion is his lack of patience.

I think you have to remove Rumsfeld out of the equation, I remember very well when he was brought in by GW he had a very basic goal. That was to
shrink the militay. Make it smaller, leaner and agile, remember that? All the military brass was at a clash when he came in to the point that many
generals were removed from their position and replaced with YES SIR! type of guys, that in result put us in the mess that we found ourselves in
Irak.

Rumsfeld IMO had no idea of what he was getting into, more like he was blindsided than anything else, they even attack the Pentagon that day and he
was in the building (if im correct), more like he was left out of the loop.

No, I really was being a "dumb American." Palestinians are Arab, but not Saudi Arabian. The distinction between nationality and culture is
fundamental to the point I was trying to make. The Palestinians had nothing to do with 9/11 because Israel would have crucified them en masse. This is
why non-Palestinian Arabs were used.

Onto the other direction. Haste is not always a good thing for certain, but anyone who knows anything about military planning knows that plans can be
quite useless once the ball is in play so to speak. Improvisation and adaptation are more important. Not losing momentum is critical to battlefield
tactics. You stop, you die. Even if your whole plan just got shot to *stinking hotpile*.

But we are talking about political groups.
And acting hastily spells disaster.
Will destroy your career if the gamble fails and possibly make you a criminal or hunted man.
The benefits to 9/11 were vast. But why risk it all when you don't have to. These people do after all have all the wealth and privilage they could
ever want. Why get hasty and chance blowing it all into nothingness?

The benefits to 9/11 were vast. But why risk it all when you don't have to. These people do after all have all the wealth and privilage they could
ever want. Why get hasty and chance blowing it all into nothingness?

[edit on 28-1-2008 by WraothAscendant]

How do we define benefits of 9-11, who really benefited out of it? Dick Cheney through his Halliburton connection might had as tangible benefit as I
can see, but who else benefited out of it? I dont see Mr. Silverstein as big of a player to be calling shots or nothing.

Don't know. Like I said I approached the whole situation as if I was some mover and shaker within government that wanted, well, a police state. But
as I would be would very very very cautious and wouldn't have well risked the farm to speak for my aims. I would be after all well to do anyway as
most people in Washington are (politicians and etc not Joe Blow living in DC).

They did after all get the patriotic act, homeland security, expanded powers for FEMA.
Oh not to forget the economic possiblities war create.
All meekly agreed to by a scared public that wanted the illusion of security.

Will destroy your career if the gamble fails and possibly make you a criminal or hunted man. The benefits to 9/11 were vast. But why risk it all when
you don't have to. These people do after all have all the wealth and privilage they could ever want. Why get hasty and chance blowing it all into
nothingness?

Why did Hitler turon on Russia? He thought he was a master tactician. Maybe Bush really thinks he's a fighter pilot too. This was a terrorist attack
by air after all.

That's a shot in the dark really. I think there is probably something out there that happened, mabe in the month or so before 9/11 that forced their
hand. This is where we must look for new evidence.

While I disagree that anything forced their hands. Remember I don't think the Pentagon, Bldg 7 and Shanksville was anything other than what I stated
before, a nice pre-planned way to muddy the waters and help keep us chasing our own tails and bickering.

But I wholeheartedly say "Go for it" on your research.
I never try to pretend that I am 100% right on everything.
My being wrong is a possiblity I am willing to accept.

I'm inclined to think he was a not very bright puppet (the man has a slackjawed yokle blank stare widely publisied for freaking sake). Otherwise
we'd never know about that property.
And even if things went south, and he had to run the moon wouldn't be far enough to get away from a very angry US people over something like this.

Oh yea I just remembered this.
If I had to implicate anyone as being the ringleader it would have to be Daddy Bush.
He was after all a director of the CIA.
And there was a bit of reporting I saw saying that Bush Jr. doesn't listen much to his father. Which is what I would arrange just to make sure and
bury any connection.
You know put on a good show so most people would scoff at the implication.

As far as planning goes, what about the Northwoods documents? The government did plan similar actions that they would have emplemented theirselves. No
allowing others to do it. It would have been all us. Now Im not saying that isnt exactly what did happen on 911, allowing it to happen, Im just saying
it isnt above the government to create such a plan and follow through with it all on their own.

Now, if I'm hearing you right; your saying there were no CD's on the WTC complex?

If so it goes against the plan. That plan being that those buildings (the very visible symbol of America) MUST come down, completely, or near
completely, at least to the point rebuilding is out of the question.

In that scenario, I doubt they'd rely, on -1-, 767 doing the job perfectly, and completely. This has never been done before, so there's no way
anyone will no if it will result in catastrophic failure.

As far as too many mouths to keep shut for CD...So you bring in a crack crew of guys that won't talk 20 is about all you need. The government has
that. If you have questions about any of them, you kill them in an accident shortly after 9/11.

But a some well placed demo charges/squibs, and a handful of thermate cutter charges at the right spots. This -again- could be done in those
powerdowns leading up to 9/11 by I'd say 20 well trained wetwork guys, at most 30.

Also it was a 4th jet, not 3rd, hat crashed in shanksville which I believe was meant to be shot down, and reported as shot down, to make it look like
the government was actually doing SOMETHING the morning of 9/11.

But then the "Lets Roll" story came about, and the government thought THAT would rally even more people, so they went that way. Just an unseen bonus
for the criminals.

But I like this post alot. But I don't think the government after the total failure the 93' bombing was, would leave anything to chance. Those
buildings HAD to come down. Again I don't think they'd risk anyother 93' by just relying on those planes.

I'm sure they asked the builders of WTC1 and 2, and you know what they would have said/have been saying all along. That those buildings could
withstand one large airliner impact easily. So where do they go from there? either hit the buildingings with 2 to 3 planes each (can't too far
fetched), or over the few years lading up to 9/11 start placing charges, then the weeks right before 9/11 have some powerdowns, where you can install
those final cutting charges.

Really who the heck knows exactly what the most evil minds this generation has known were conconcting. I just doubt they'd bank it all on those
planes. Unless they weren't ordinary planes, but filled with high tell demo munitions to destroy every inner core column the plane touched
(shrug).

Again I just don't buy that 1 ordinary 767 could bring one of the WTC buildings down, without "extra" help.

You are just seeing this now? This plan was developed by the rich guys back in the 40's or so with the Rockefellers, and friends. They are currently
more than half way through with their plan. You will know we are near the end of their one world governement plan when the US, Canada, and Mexico have
one governement. The next step after that will be to make each group EU,NU, Asia, Africa, SAU to combine into the World Union.

A possibility, too, is what if you were a big player outside the government and you had some very big contacts and caught wind of the plan. So you
come up with a your own little plan as an add on for your own benefit. You know there won't be a thorough investigation as it would risk the people
in government being exposed.

I'm not saying this is what happened, just a thought on an obscure Monday morning. But what if you were a big real estate developer, you hear of the
plan so you snatch up the target, take out some insurance and, just to be sure, you rig the place to come down when it takes place. Now, with all that
destruction, you know they'll be doing everything they can so it won't get back to them.

My point is, why must this be a choice only between the government and the terrorists? What if there were many small tightly knit groups with their
own agendas. What if (if these are all true) the CD, the put options, the massive trades in the tower before collapse, the missing gold, the destroyed
SEC files and other things we don't know about were all "add-ons" to the central let-it-happen plan? Basically, what if "more mouths" brought
themselves in and the government is now forced to cover it all or risk exposing their hand in it?

Never ever believe what your told- no matter who its from- thats what I've learned...

When the gov't tried to cover-up Flight 93 crashing but presented little evidence of plane wreckage and materials- I was not surprised....a paper had
even wrote ("Looked as if a bunch of metal scraps had been thrown on the scene")

Nor was I surprised when I saw pictures of the pentagon hit by what looked more like an explosive or missile rather than a plane because like I said-
there were no parts...as well as the small amount of devastation compared to if a plane truly did hit it. (A slim fragment of the building was
destroyed compared to what really would have occurred had a plane slammed into it).

- I ask you...If a large 747 Boeing jet hits the ground or a building, would it not create a HUGE crater full of wreckage???? THINK ABOUT IT...its not
like a missile where you hit one spot and the rest is fine...there should be sign of damage on the lowest to highest infrastructure, area near it,
flames would be everywhere, etc...

Now we move onto the twin towers...Besides many people hearing "explosions", there have been videos slowed down, image zoomed in, etc. that have
shown a clear detonation (windows popping out before plane even hit the building). Now I dont know if it was Giuliani or Bush that made that call to
"pull" those towers but clearly those detonations would have been made from BOMBS PLANTED PREVIOUSLY before ANY attack had taken place. The heat
that melted the steel of the building was far too hot for any jet fuel or flame attached to it. The impact itself no doubt happened but I believe it
was pre-meditated as much as it could have been. I have heard that there is speculation as to it could have been mini-nukes (which they may or may
not have used in the Oklahoma city bombing) and or large amounts of c-4. Im not an explosives expert but there have been countless experts that agree
with my statement- the collapse was clearly due to a pre-meditated large explosive and the steel melted far too hot for a plane explosion.

- "9-11 was in inside job" I believe the website stated something about an ex-FBI agent going to lunch with 2 superiors in march of 2001 who
discussed the FBI staging some sort of "terrorist" act somewhere in a major city. The anthrax that was unleashed also thereafter would belong to the
"staged" category as well....My mother worked in one of the tabloid buildings that the anthrax exposure was and one of her co-workers had died from
exposure to it.

I don't know how people can believe such nonsense that the government is innocent....Don't you think with all the technology and abuse of privacy we
have, we would have been able to stop a few planes from crashing into the most important buildings in our country? The CIA, FBI, and every other
organization has specific agencies within them that work 24/7 365 days a year to prevent terrorism, did they take the day off? How can you just
believe that the government "slipped" on that one day? Those attacks lead us into an unjustified, wreckless, endangering war that we have gone into
completely blind. Everyday you go to your homepage I'm sure you see "5 marines killed in roadside bombing" or "30 killed in suicide blast"-
everyone of those innocent people and soldiers that have died needlessly deserve the truth. The government is no longer the government- its become a
secret dictatorship hidden beneath secret laws being passed for their grand plan- meanwhile our pockets are bleeding dry, gas is at an all time high,
and bush walks around the world with a smile on his face...It's these kind of attacks that scare people into giving their rights away to be "safe"
which is just what they want. We don't need protection from terrorists, we need protection from our own government. The scary thing is- if they
planned and executed this kind of attack once- they will most certainly do it again.

Our forefathers wouldn't be disappointed- they would be disgusted.

You don't have to believe or agree- I'm just asking you to rethink what you've heard, question it, then come about your own conclusions....not just
what you've heard or read...Is it not possible to pay off "scientists" or "experts" to present false information to the public? I am not one for
conspiracy's but 9-11 has too many unanswered questions...unfortunately many people who lost their lives that day will never get the chance to fight-
so I choose to fight for them.

This content community relies on user-generated content from our member contributors. The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides a collaborative venue for free expression.